The mad scramble to catch up on the surprisingly early Queensland election has left BludgerTrack unattended to, despite the publication last week of the first polls of the year on voting intention from Essential Research and Roy Morgan, together with a bonus Morgan phone poll on leadership ratings (supplemented by these findings on preferred Liberal and Labor leader, which find Tony Abbott is now in third place behind Julie Bishop as well as Malcolm Turnbull). My normal practice of updating this overnight on Wednesday/Thursday will resume henceforth.
The latest reading records a pretty solid shift to the Coalition since the last result in mid-December. In comparison with the in-depth state-level reading I put together after The Australian published Newspoll’s quarterly state breakdowns at the end of the year, the Coalition is up two seats in New South Wales and one each in Victoria and Queensland. But if you want to hold off for polling not conducted during the summer break before taking the results too seriously, I won’t judge you.
Closely inspect the scatterplot on the sidebar (located lower down than usual thanks to the Queensland election poll tracker) and you will observe the disparity between the results from Essential Research and Roy Morgan, the latter of which appears twice as I break it down into two separate results to reflect the fact that it is conducted over two weekends. As you can see, the trendline seeks to split the difference between the two sets of results, and considers last year’s polling to be old news. The two pollsters’ headline two-party figures were in fact much the same, but came out very differently once the meaty bias adjustment to the notoriously pro-Labor Morgan series was applied. Similar caveats should be applied to the Greens vote, which is now in single figures for the first time since who knows when. This may well be accurate for all I know, but the wisest course would be to consider the jury out for the time being.
The leadership ratings are arguably a bit more interesting, since they encompass a result from Roy Morgan’s low-sample but otherwise high quality phone polling, together with the monthly reading from Essential Research. Both leaders are found to be up quite substantially on net approval, consistent with the notion that the summer break tends to soften the public mood. Bill Shorten had remarkably static ratings throughout 2014, outside of a bump in his favour following the budget, but on the current reading at least he’s moved into the black. Tony Abbott has also moved in a positive direction for the first time since Coalition polling started heading south again in October. On preferred prime minister though, the leaders’ gains cancel out, leaving Shorten’s lead much as it was before.
BW
[I wonder which way the Greens would jump if Shorten offered a policy whereby Manus would be closed down in exchange for a Malaysian solution that met UNHCR thresholds of accountability and transparency?]
None of us would, and if any did, they would be ejected before the sun went down. We would never support coercive rendition.
WWP
The Greens policy is what they think is best for refugees.
BW
I have said this at least 5 times before but you always ignore it because it does not fit your preconceived notions:
The problem with Malaysian deal was MALAYSIA !!! While the principle of a people swap had merit – we take a large number of Rohingas in exchange for a smaller number of Iraqi and Iranians had net advantages, the problem was Malaysia. The deal did not stack up because the Malaysian government would not sign any sort of agreement or commitment. NIX, NIL, Zilch. Clearly any deal that did not have any legal or signed commitment was not a deal at all. Labor was stupid to announce the deal until they had something signed and sealed. Not a handshake and a photo op with a junior minister which was what they actually got.
Manus might have worked for a short time – ie scared off the economic refugees and provided a resettlement option for some especially Sri Lankans, the deliberate mistreatment, neglect and brutalization of the prisoners is despicable and something for which Australia will forever be reviled across the world.
BW
No matter how you twist and turn you cannot argue against fact.
Fact Green policy is opposition to off shore.
Thats it. As such they were never going to vote for Malaysia and you are intelligent enough to know it.
The only failure of Labor to get Malaysia up was the political bastardy of the LNP.
I think you are intelligent enough to know that too. So blame the LNP not the Greens.
[Fran Barlow
Posted Tuesday, January 20, 2015 at 12:22 pm | Permalink
BW
ALL government policies that shift resources around trade peoples’ lives, wealth and welfare.
Textbook equivocation.]
It is textbook blunt. Governments make least-worst decisions all the time. OTHO, the Greens do not do ‘equivocation’ because they don’t do government.
[My use of the word ‘trade’ was quite explicit. It was a people swap solution. That other public policies resettle burdens and benefits within and between populations is quite another matter.]
Textbook begging the question by sly use of the word ‘trade’. Humans are traded all the time in government trade-offs.
[In this case, people were going to be coerced to go to Malaysia and told they could never return, regardless of their circumstances. That’s unheard of in Australian policy. With the excoetion of never to be released prisoners i.e. those convicted of a serious crime, our domestic populace isbot treated this way. Also, minors are not treated this way.]
Textbook unfacts abound. Around 6-7,000 humans in Australia are about to be coerced off their homeland centres onto the margines of urban hellholes that are every bit as bad as Manus. Aboriginal kids are going into another stolen generation. No Greens uproar on that one, either.
[I know that the Greens would prefer to think that they can govern in a perfect vacuum where there are only good choices and only perfect outcomes.
And this is your textbook strawman.]
Nope. It is SOP for the Greens to pretend that perfection is possible in an imperfect world. The corollary is that when an imperfection is ‘forced’ on the Greens by imperfect political parties, then it is routinely the fault of those parties.
The Greens do a sort of pertpetual motion Pontius Pilate.
[It comes back to this: Malaysia would have been a much less bad or much better solution than Manus.
So you say, but that’s a guess, as it was for the then Australian ruling regime, But whether they were right to think so or not, it was not their call. This ought to have been the uncoerced judgement of those whose bodies were on the line.]
You have moved from ‘hypothetical’ to its a ‘guess’. I have provided information which demonstrates that it was neither ‘hypothetical’ nor a guess, including active UNHCCR involvement in the negotiations about the practicalities of accountability and transparency.
Annastacia Palaszczuk: “Does Campbell Newman not want to be seen with Tony Abbott? Or is it the other way around?”
Fran, RaaRaa
[It’s like saying Iran is more transparent and accountable compared to North Korea. It is, but that’s not a strong point.]
[I suspect RaaRaa had Malaysia as Iran in the analogy, and Iran too is a democracy ‘of sorts’.]
Textbook two false analogies in one go.
Iran and North Korea are both part of the Axis of evil whereas Malaysia is a democracy, of sorts.
bw
Sticky ground quoting George W Bush Axis of Evil.
[WP
The Greens policy is what they think is best for refugees]
lol what would be best for all of us is immortality in some kind of heaven but you need to believe in God and pick the right God and then qualify by the rules of the God you select. Doesn’t tell you much at all about what is specifically best for us today. Still more useful than greens policies.
[Fran Barlow
Posted Tuesday, January 20, 2015 at 12:26 pm | Permalink
And of course, it should be added that when one compares two conditions, to evaluate which is preferable, one considers not merely quantitative differences but qualitative ones.
A hungry man who has to choose between a place selling food laced with rat poison may think the place selling food that is seriously ptomaine less deadly, but he should probably just keep walking because neither is likely to be consistent with preserving his life chances.]
Textbook false proposition based on false analogy based on false equivalence:
Malaysia was well on the way to negotiating UNHCCR standards of accountability and transparency.
WWP
Yeah the Greens have bee so wrong in sticking to human rights. So wrong in sticking to protecting the environment. So wrong in supporting Labor’s NBN not the LNP Fraudband. etc etc.
[guytaur
Posted Tuesday, January 20, 2015 at 12:43 pm | Permalink
bw
Sticky ground quoting George W Bush Axis of Evil.]
Textbook ad hominem attack on W. It has nothing to do with the Greens’ continuing preference for Manus over Malaysia.
BW
How are human rights in Malaysia? Has the sodomy charge (a human rights breach) been rescinded against Opposition Leader?
bw
You are the one that brought up axis of evil not me
“Labor Controls the Senate”
this had escaped my attention and I thought that William and others here might like to know this.
This statement is attributed to the the Government’s treasurer and numbers man Joe Hockey – pg9 – Australian 21/1 (I got another free copy).
He goes onto say
[they control the Senate and therefore they are the ones who are blocking the solutions and they are the ones who need to come up with alternatives]
Funny, before September 2013 he seemed to have all of the answers….
Also in todays Aus:
Judith Sloan
[The health policy debate is starting to sound like a joke]
… no I haven’t read it.
[Fran Barlow
Posted Tuesday, January 20, 2015 at 12:31 pm | Permalink
BW
I wonder which way the Greens would jump if Shorten offered a policy whereby Manus would be closed down in exchange for a Malaysian solution that met UNHCR thresholds of accountability and transparency?
None of us would, and if any did, they would be ejected before the sun went down. We would never support coercive rendition.]
I do hope that the Manus detainees have access to this post. Just so they know exactly where the Greens stand on the choice between Malaysia and Manus.
[Had the Greens supported Malaysia there would be no Manus. But the Greens did not support Malaysia and now we have a Manus.]
There is/was of course a third option – no Malaysia or Manus.
China CDP has risen again not fallen as pundits expected
JR
Yep.
Hockey’s week one stupidities:
1. Australians pay half their income in tax.
2. Labor controls the Senate.
3. A child born maybe next year or maybe the year after might live to 150 and that is a justification for something or other in Coalition policy.
4. Some peoples have told him that he is back in the running for the top job and he is waving his baton about.
5. Someone else, probably one of his spear carriers at Hockey’s request, has leaked some Cabinet-in-Confidence stuff about Hockey’s ‘heated’ stoush with the Prime Minister.
Sloan is also rather tricky when she states, ‘The Health policy debate is starting to sound like a joke.’ What she neatly avoids saying is that the Coalition’s health policies are a running shambles and not funny at all.
[Yeah the Greens have bee so wrong in sticking to human rights. So wrong in sticking to protecting the environment. So wrong in supporting Labor’s NBN not the LNP Fraudband. etc etc.]
No you clown they have been so wrong to stick to a utopian policy when facing a choice between two other polices because in two critical instances you’ve sided with Abbott based on your utopian policy and in doing so caused harm to the environment and refugees who you are supposed to want to help. Your posts suggest this was political (the greens voter base being unhappy with them supporting the Malaysian solution) and that the greens just don’t have the intellectual capacity to pick the better of two policies – or if they can won’t do so if it is politically advantageous!
[ltep
Posted Tuesday, January 20, 2015 at 12:49 pm | Permalink
Had the Greens supported Malaysia there would be no Manus. But the Greens did not support Malaysia and now we have a Manus.
There is/was of course a third option – no Malaysia or Manus.]
Textbook hypothetical. This will only happen when the Greens form government. Wake me up when that happens.
[guytaur
Posted Tuesday, January 20, 2015 at 12:47 pm | Permalink
BW
How are human rights in Malaysia? Has the sodomy charge (a human rights breach) been rescinded against Opposition Leader?]
Textbook false comparison which ignores how bad Manus really is.
WWP
Thats some crazy logic there. Abbott voted against his policy to side with the Greens. Not the other way around.
[There is/was of course a third option – no Malaysia or Manus.]
Not in the real world there wasn’t.
[rossmcg
Posted Tuesday, January 20, 2015 at 12:30 pm | Permalink
Dio
i suspect that in Indonesia many of the people charged with catching drug smugglers are in fact associated with drug smugglers.
its a nest of vipers]
I imagine that BK will be mightily relieved to know that they are not puff adders.
WWP
Upholding the UN treaty on human rights and refugees is not exactly utopian policy
Boerwar, the Greens aren’t responsible for legislating ALP policy.
BW
You are the one doing the hypothetical. So you must address the reality of what the country is doing before you can set up your hypothetical.
Remember the Greens have not set up Manus or continued running it.
[Not in the real world there wasn’t.]
Of course there was – Labor just lacked the strength of character and leadership to carry a sensible policy forward. Why the Greens should have been expected to support a dud policy directly contrary to the wishes of their voters is beyond me.
[
WWP
Thats some crazy logic there. Abbott voted against his policy to side with the Greens. Not the other way around.]
That is probably right and altogether neither the greens or the libs really gave a thought to the refugees. Abbott because he actually didn’t care the greens because try were unable to be pragmatic and make a decision in the best interests of the refugees unless it was their utopian policy.
Boerwar @945:
Malaysia is not a democracy. It has the trappings of a democracy (for instance, regular elections with theoretical freedom to compete for votes and seats), but the electoral outcomes are known in advance. UMNO has always been the Prime Minister’s party (since independence in 1959), and it will always be the Prime Minister’s party.
This has been achieved by judicious rigging of the rules to favour UMNO, shameless abuse of state media in favour of the incumbents and assorted other tricks that belong to a dictatorship.
Granted, UMNO (and its political coalition, Barisan Nacional) have typically been somewhat self-restrained in how they use their power – but there’s no disputing that they have it. 2008, for instance, was the first election ever in which BN failed to achieve a supermajority in Parliament, and in 2013, BN lost the popular vote (for the first time) but still won nearly 60% of all the seats – Joh would have been proud of that result!
I personally favoured the Malaysia Solution, with the caveat of additional safeguards to ensure that asylum seekers were treated in accordance with the relevant Conventions – but don’t claim that Malaysia’s something it’s not.
WWP
Wrong. Greens policy is based on the refugees. To the extent the right complains about the Greens being too much in favour of the refugees.
[Of course there was – Labor just lacked the strength of character and leadership to carry a sensible policy forward. ]
Hilarious.
BW
[I do hope that the Manus detainees have access to this post. Just so they know exactly where the Greens stand on the choice between Malaysia and Manus.]
Ah … We agree on something.
Personally, I was disappointed at the Greens’ categorical rejection of the Malaysia Solution Mk.II – it indicated a preference for purity over outcomes.
An unfortunate day, given that (a) Australia would have accepted more refugees, quicker, (b) Malaysia was at least theoretically willing to consider safeguards for their treatment of the refugees we sent there for processing and (c) Australia would actually have spent less per head.
Unfortunate.
[Of course there was – Labor just lacked the strength of character and leadership to carry a sensible policy forward. Why the Greens should have been expected to support a dud policy directly contrary to the wishes of their voters is beyond me.]
So what were the wishes of Labor voters?
[must address the reality]
Coming from the Greens?
😆
Matt @981
I think I will stick to my original statement: ‘Malaysia is a democracy, sort of.’
I believe that your facts are generally correct but that your interpretations are incorrect. For example, there are numerous examples where UMNO has responded to polling and to electoral outcomes that threaten its hold on power.
In other words it is a sort of a democracy in which voting does make some difference.
Whether it would ever make enough of a difference to unseat UMNO, I don’t know. It is a bit like the Singapore democracy.
[Fran Barlow
Posted Tuesday, January 20, 2015 at 1:04 pm | Permalink
BW
I do hope that the Manus detainees have access to this post. Just so they know exactly where the Greens stand on the choice between Malaysia and Manus.
Ah … We agree on something.]
I had expected you would.
[So what were the wishes of Labor voters?]
I suspect some were supportive, some not (as I imagine was the position in Caucus). Not sure what relevance that has to the point that the Greens shouldn’t be expected to legislate ALP policy.
Well, to sum up the morning’s post, I believe that we can all agree that if the Greens had only supported the Malaysian solution we would not have the Manus solution.
Alternatively, I believe that we can all agree that if the Greens only had government then there would be no Manus, no Malaysia and no Nauru and instead we would be docking ocean liners chock-a-bloc with asylum seekers. That is, if we were not actually be flying them in plane loads at a time.
[I suspect some were supportive, some not (as I imagine was the position in Caucus). Not sure what relevance that has to the point that the Greens shouldn’t be expected to legislate ALP policy.]
But you expect Labor to show “strength of character and leadership”. What does this mean? Does it mean overriding the wishes of Labor voters?
BW
Australia has not had the numbers Italy is coping with. Unlikely to either due to geography.
Try another strawman
Boerwar @988:
When voters have no practical ability to change electoral outcomes, it’s not a democracy. The UMNO’s largely commendable history of self-restraint in the use of its power does not make Malaysia a democracy.
Although the outcome has been unpredictably appalling, the Greens did the right thing to stick by principle in rejecting the Malaysia deal.
If Malaysia had shown commitment (from both Government and Opposition) to the deal I think it would have been OK but unless the Malaysians were willing to sign on to protecting human rights at least equivalent to the UNHCR (not necessarily sign it but pass legislation etc) then I would have been OK with it. But without such guarantees it would have been stupid beyond belief.
Cambodia is interesting. It seems as if the government IS enthusiastic (at least for the dosh) BUT there is no cultural connection with any of the groups of refugees so I am not confident it will prove viable. It might be worth a try with a SMALL number of refugees.
[But you expect Labor to show “strength of character and leadership”. What does this mean? Does it mean overriding the wishes of Labor voters?]
Yes, I hope that all political parties will show strength of character and leadership rather than caving in to populism.
Conceptually it’s harder to characterise what the wishes of a mainstream party like the ALP will be. With a broader base it’s only natural there will be competing wishes.
For the Greens however, who are a minor party, they clearly represent that section of the community who doesn’t support offshore processing. To turn their backs on these people would be to disenfranchise those parts of the community.
The parties supporting offshore processing of maritime arrivals represent somewhere around 75% of the public and should therefore be expected to be able to gather the numbers to legislate a policy of offshore processing quite easily.
BW
[Well, to sum up the morning’s post, I believe that we can all agree that if the Greens had only supported the Malaysian solution we would not have the Manus solution.]
I don’t agree we can. Had my party gone completely mad and done that this would not have saved the ALP regime. It would still have been turfed from office for reasons that had little to do with ‘stopping the boats’ and pandering in that respect to the Murdoch/RWNJ community. The new regime would have implemented Manus citing the failure of the ALP policy to stop the boats. Recall that Cambodia has been devised so that the LNP can posture as tougher on ‘border security’ than the ALP.
[Alternatively, I believe that we can all agree that if the Greens only had government then there would be no Manus, no Malaysia and no Nauru and instead we would be docking ocean liners chock-a-bloc with asylum seekers. That is, if we were not actually be flying them in plane loads at a time.]
If we were in government now we’d be working out a global set of arrangements for supporting forcibly displaced persons not merely on the basis of refugee claims but arising from other causes. We would probably be looking in the first instance to improve conditions at existing aggregation points so as to discourage preemptive resort to IMP, while moving those meeting the UNHCR standard via orthodox means to Australia, NZ or any other third country willing to accept them that the applicants for protection deemed acceptable.
We would of course be seeking to play a part in staunching the push factors in outflows through better support of human development programs, and unlike the ALP, suitable support for the MDGs and so forth.
Good Essential 🙂
[So you are saying that like the liberals for the greens it was never going to be a question about what is best for the refugees – that question apparently never came into play – it was all about playing to and shoring up their respective political bases.]
What you are saying is that the Greens should have supported the lesser evil of two options. i don’t know about that.
What is best for refugees coming to Australia is to be allowed into the Australian community after reasonable health and security checks. If no one in Australian politics advocates for this we become less of a nation.
But regardless of that you and others are saying the Greens should have supported the Malaysia solution because a concentration camp on a tropical island hellhole (who would have thought such things existed) was worse.
Here’s a thought.
How many boat people escaping from Iran are doing so because of persecution about their sexuality. (I don’t know, but I would be surprised if the answer is none.) How is sending those people to Malaysia – where allegations about someone’s sexuality led to their torture, imprisonment and the destruction of their political career – a good thing. I know speculating about the motivations of Iranian asylum seekers is just speculation, but its reasonable to think that could be the motivation for some of them given that Iran has executed gay men.
Surely that has to be taken into consideration.
Blaming the Greens is a bit like someone telling you that they will hurt a victim, but you have a choice about how much they’re gonna hurt that victim – you can choose a that they give them a brutal bashing or that they will chop off the victims fingers. Then blaming you for the victim’s fate when you tell them to fuck off.
For the record I think reasonable regional solutions are the only way to deal fairly with refugees – the problem will only become bigger, but i don’t think the Malaysian solution was a fair or reasonable one.
Ultimately the responsibility for this situation rests with the people who brought back offshore processing, and to a much greater extent with the people (ie the electorate not just the lib govt, including you and me) who think preventative punishment is a reasonable way to deal with people asking for help.
No Matt, essential. I was proud that my party at least did not buckle to the right wing hectoring.